I dissent because there was substantial evidence that supported the Human
Rights Commission's ruling.

There is a symbiotic, day-to-day operational relationship between WVU and
WVUH that belies any separate entity claim. See Syllabus Point 10, Queen v. University
Hospital, 179 W.Va. 95, 365 S.E.2d 375 (1987).

Moreover, the separate entity claim by WVU was never even considered by
the HRC _ because WVU did not raise it before the HRC.

In the proceedings before the HRC, WVU presented an ever-changing
moving target series of purported non-discriminatory explanations for its conduct. Each
explanation, as it arose, was shot out of the water by the actual evidence.

Then, at the circuit court level, with the record closed, WVU brought up the
separate entity argument for the first time _ at a time when Ms. Prince was precluded from
offering more evidence to show the ongoing cooperation of the two entities in discriminatory
conduct. Ms. Prince was simply sandbagged.